Girl Scout Cookies (GSC): Cultivar Profile With Sources, Lineage Claims and Lab Data Limits
Girl Scout Cookies (GSC) is a widely named cannabis cultivar. See what sources say about its lineage, one published terpene dataset, and why no verified potency figure is given.
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
- Girl Scout Cookies
- Aliases
- Cookies, GSC
- Name conflicts
- Related listings such as Thin Mint GSC and Platinum GSC exist; the short form GSC is used partly because of legal action by the Girl Scouts of America.
- Breeder attribution
- California breeder Jigga (Cookies Fam), who said the common parentage story was circulated to deter copying. (Reported)
- Retail label
- Hybrid (retail label) (a marketing category, not a measurement)
- Cannabinoid dominance
- THC-dominant
Reported lineage
- OG Kush x Durban Poison (most commonly described). (Disputed; source: The Cannigma. Girl Scout Cookies strain. Attributed media description, not evidence of composition or effect. Read 2026-10-22.)
- Durban Poison combined with an in-house F1 line, stabilized, then crossed with a kush (OG Kush). (Reported; source: Leafly. Cannabis Strain Highlight: Cookie Fam Certified GSC (f.k.a. Girl Scout Cookies). Attributed marketplace feature. Read 2026-10-22.)
Laboratory measurements: cannabinoids
Maryland (6 analytes)
dataset (Maryland flower, N=15 samples; test dates 2018-01-13 to 2019-12-20; median of 13 samples with a value). Laboratory: lab ID 6401 (6); lab ID 1201 (5); lab ID 2501 (3); lab ID 1101 (1). Dates: 2018-01-13 to 2019-12-20. 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 |
| CBDA | 0.021 | 0 | 1.86 |
| CBG | 0.08 | 0 | 2.3 |
| CBN | 0 | 0 | 2.22 |
| Delta-9 THC | 0.337 | 0.24 | 0.51 |
| THCA | 21.64 | 17.6 | 25.49 |
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=19 samples; test dates 2020-01-08 to 2021-04-12; median of 19 samples with a value). Laboratory: CERTIFIED AG LAB LLC (19). Dates: 2020-01-08 to 2021-04-12. 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 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.09 |
| CBN | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Delta-9 THC | 0.43 | 0.29 | 0.75 |
| THCA | 18.3 | 14.4 | 21.29 |
| Total cannabinoids | 18.86 | 14.83 | 21.89 |
| Total THC | 16.55 | 13.01 | 19.22 |
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.
Each row describes the stated sample or dataset only. Composition varies between batches. Sources are listed in the page references.
Laboratory measurements: terpenes
Nevada (8 terpenes)
dataset (Nevada flower, N=19 samples; test dates 2020-01-08 to 2021-04-12; median of 14 samples with a value). Laboratory: CERTIFIED AG LAB LLC (19). Dates: 2020-01-08 to 2021-04-12. 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 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.09 |
| alpha-Humulene | 0.24 | 0.12 | 0.66 |
| beta-Caryophyllene | 0.91 | 0.56 | 1.31 |
| beta-Myrcene | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.09 |
| beta-Pinene | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.08 |
| D-Limonene | 0.095 | 0.04 | 0.19 |
| Linalool | 0.1 | 0.03 | 0.14 |
| Total terpenes | 1.61 | 0.84 | 1.88 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Humulene | 3.2 mg/g | dataset (N=16 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 |
| Limonene (peak may overlap with β-phellandrene) | 3.4 mg/g | dataset (N=16 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 1.0 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 | 1.5 mg/g | dataset (N=16 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 |
| Myrcene | 1.8 mg/g | dataset (N=16 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 |
| β-Caryophyllene | 6.7 mg/g | dataset (N=16 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-Pinene | 0.5 mg/g | dataset (N=16 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.2 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 |
| beta-caryophyllene | 6.7 mg/g flower (dataset mean; SD 1.3; n=16) | dataset | samples labeled with the cultivar name from one California medical dispensary, n=16 | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, California) | not stated (samples collected over one year; paper published 2017) | GC with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| beta-pinene | 0.5 mg/g flower (dataset mean; SD 0.2; n=16) | dataset | samples labeled with the cultivar name from one California medical dispensary, n=16 | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, California) | not stated (samples collected over one year; paper published 2017) | GC with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| humulene | 3.2 mg/g flower (dataset mean; SD 0.6; n=16) | dataset | samples labeled with the cultivar name from one California medical dispensary, n=16 | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, California) | not stated (samples collected over one year; paper published 2017) | GC with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| limonene | 3.4 mg/g flower (dataset mean; SD 1.0; n=16) | dataset | samples labeled with the cultivar name from one California medical dispensary, n=16 | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, California) | not stated (samples collected over one year; paper published 2017) | GC with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| linalool | 1.5 mg/g flower (dataset mean; SD 0.6; n=16) | dataset | samples labeled with the cultivar name from one California medical dispensary, n=16 | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, California) | not stated (samples collected over one year; paper published 2017) | GC with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| myrcene | 1.8 mg/g flower (dataset mean; SD 0.5; n=16) | dataset | samples labeled with the cultivar name from one California medical dispensary, n=16 | Excelsior Analytical Laboratory, Inc. (Union City, California) | not stated (samples collected over one year; paper published 2017) | GC with flame ionization detection; peaks confirmed by GC-MS |
| Humulene | 3.2 mg/g | dataset (N=16 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.6) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=16) | 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 | 3.4 mg/g | dataset (N=16 dried flower samples; mean, SD 1.0) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=16) | 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 | 1.5 mg/g | dataset (N=16 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.6) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=16) | 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 | 1.8 mg/g | dataset (N=16 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.5) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=16) | 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 | 6.7 mg/g | dataset (N=16 dried flower samples; mean, SD 1.3) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=16) | 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 | 0.5 mg/g | dataset (N=16 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.2) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=16) | 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 |
Quick answer
Girl Scout Cookies, shortened to GSC, is a cultivar name (commonly called a strain). The usual story is that it came from OG Kush and Durban Poison, but the breeder's own account is more complicated. This page keeps apart what sources claim, what a laboratory measured, and what people report. No cultivar name guarantees a chemical makeup or an effect. This page is information only, not medical or legal advice.Identity and names
GSC is also written "Cookies" in some listings.[1] A cannabis news site says legal action from the Girl Scouts of America is why "GSC" is the form generally used.[2] Many variations carry related names, such as Thin Mint GSC and Platinum GSC.[1] The name alone therefore does not tell you which version, if any, is the original.Reported lineage and breeder claims
- Breeder attribution (reported). One marketplace encyclopedia credits a California breeder named Jigga with crossing a sub-type of OG Kush with an intermediate line called F1 Durban.[1] Another site says Jigga is the main breeder at Cookies Fam.[2]
- Common parentage (reported, disputed). GSC is most often described as OG Kush crossed with Durban Poison. The same site reports that Jigga said such stories were put out to keep people from copying the work.[2]
- Breeder's fuller version (reported). A 2014 interview, as summarized by that site, describes an in-house line called F1 crossed with Durban Poison, stabilized, and then crossed with a kush.[2] A second marketplace feature gives a matching summary.[3]
- Genetic testing. A study of 30 commercial cultivar names tested eight samples sold as GSC. It found no consistent genetic pattern among them.[4] The authors describe GSC as "clone only," yet the eight samples showed little genetic cohesiveness.[4]
So the lineage is a claim with low confidence. No genetic study we read confirms the parents.
Classification
Retail listings call GSC an indica-dominant hybrid.[1][2] That is a market label. In the same genetic study, the two genetic groups found did not match the commonly reported Sativa, Hybrid and Indica types.[4] A separate analysis of commercial samples across six US states found that commercial labels do not consistently align with measured chemical diversity.[5] Read more in why labels do not predict effects.Aroma
Sources describe a dessert-like aroma with mint, sweet cherry and lemon notes,[1] or sweet, earthy, minty and skunky notes.[2] These are descriptions, not measurements.Terpene data: one dataset, not a standard
A 2017 study analyzed samples from a single California medical dispensary over one year, using gas chromatography.[6] The 16 samples labeled Girl Scout Cookies gave the average values below, in milligrams per gram of flower (1 mg/g equals 0.1% by weight). The plus-or-minus figure is the spread between samples.[6]| Terpene | Average, mg/g (n = 16) |
|---|---|
| Beta-caryophyllene | 6.7 ± 1.3 |
| Limonene | 3.4 ± 1.0 |
| Humulene | 3.2 ± 0.6 |
| Myrcene | 1.8 ± 0.5 |
| Linalool | 1.5 ± 0.6 |
| Beta-pinene | 0.5 ± 0.2 |
This is a dataset average from one source and one year. It is not a guarantee for any product. In that study, GSC grouped with several other cookie-named cultivars as a beta-caryophyllene-dominant class.[6] Learn more in terpenes in cannabis.
Potency
Verified batch data was not available. Marketplace and media pages show a headline THC percentage, but those figures are aggregates without a batch, laboratory, test date or method, so we do not repeat them. Composition varies by batch. We also found no independent cannabinoid result for GSC in the studies we read. The terpene study above was done on high-THC cultivars, but it does not report cannabinoid values for GSC.[6] See how to read a certificate of analysis.Reported experiences (anecdote)
A marketplace site collects user reports. In its summary, readers most often report feeling relaxed, hungry and happy, and report dry mouth, dry eyes and anxiety as negatives.[1] These are consumer reports, not controlled research.Research
Proper evidence not found for GSC-specific clinical research. We checked Europe PMC for the cultivar name; the results were genetics and chemistry studies, and consumer-survey papers, not trials of this cultivar. General cannabinoid pages (THC) do not validate any claim about this name.Safety
Cannabis can alter time perception and impair thinking, memory and body movement. Anxiety, fear, panic or hallucinations are more common with large amounts, strong products or little experience.[7] See impairment and driving and anxiety, panic and paranoia. In the US, call 911 for an emergency and Poison Help at 1-800-222-1222 for accidental exposure.Frequently asked questions
Is Girl Scout Cookies the same as GSC?
Mostly yes. GSC is the shortened name, and it is used in part because of legal action by the Girl Scouts of America.[2] Related names such as Thin Mint GSC are separate listings.[1]
What is the lineage of Girl Scout Cookies?
The usual claim is OG Kush crossed with Durban Poison.[2] The breeder reportedly described a more complex history.[2] Genetic testing found little consistency among samples sold under the name.[4]
What are the terpenes in Girl Scout Cookies?
In one dispensary dataset the average was highest for beta-caryophyllene, then limonene, humulene, myrcene and linalool.[6] Other batches may differ.
What is the THC percentage of Girl Scout Cookies?
We could not establish a verified figure. Composition varies by batch, and marketing percentages are not independent laboratory results. Check the certificate of analysis on the actual product.
References
- Leafly. GSC aka Girl Scout Cookies strain information. Attributed marketplace description, not evidence of composition or effect. Read 2026-10-22.
- The Cannigma. Girl Scout Cookies strain. Attributed media description, not evidence of composition or effect. Read 2026-10-22.
- Leafly. Cannabis Strain Highlight: Cookie Fam Certified GSC (f.k.a. Girl Scout Cookies). Attributed marketplace feature. 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, et al. 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-Delta9-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.