Jack Herer: Cultivar Profile With Sources, Lineage Claims and Lab Data Limits
Jack Herer is a cannabis cultivar named for a cannabis author. See reported lineage, the terpinolene-rich lab dataset, label limits and why no typical potency 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
- Jack Herer
- Aliases
- JH, Platinum Jack, Premium Jack, The Jack
- Name conflicts
- Many seed companies sell their own versions under this name; sampled products showed low genetic similarity.
- Breeder attribution
- Created by Sensi Seeds, Netherlands (secondary sources). (Reported)
- Retail label
- Sativa (retail label) (a marketing category, not a measurement)
- Cannabinoid dominance
- THC-dominant
Reported lineage
- Said to be a cross of Northern Lights #5, Shiva Skunk and Haze; breeder has not published the recipe. (Reported; source: The Cannigma. Jack Herer Marijuana Strain (cannabis news and education site; secondary source). Read 2026-10-22.)
- Haze hybrid combined with a Northern Lights #5 and Shiva Skunk cross. (Reported; source: Leafly. Jack Herer Weed Strain Information (strain encyclopedia; secondary source). Read 2026-10-22.)
Laboratory measurements: cannabinoids
Maryland (6 analytes)
dataset (Maryland flower, N=317 samples; test dates 2018-03-08 to 2023-12-15; median of 295 samples with a value). Laboratory: lab ID 1101 (243); lab ID 6401 (57); lab ID 1201 (17). Dates: 2018-03-08 to 2023-12-15. 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 | 0.2 |
| CBDA | 0 | 0 | 0.14 |
| CBG | 0.1 | 0 | 1.11 |
| CBN | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Delta-9 THC | 0.5 | 0 | 1.56 |
| THCA | 21.63 | 3.7 | 32.84 |
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.
Hawaii (3 analytes)
dataset (Hawaii flower, N=13 samples; test dates 2018-11-08 to 2020-07-17; median of 13 samples with a value). Laboratory: not reported in dataset (13). Dates: 2018-11-08 to 2020-07-17. 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 |
| CBDA | 0 | 0 | 0.04 |
| Total cannabinoids | 15.65 | 11.4 | 18.04 |
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=191 samples; test dates 2020-01-02 to 2023-10-03; median of 171 samples with a value). Laboratory: NV CANN LABS LLC (100); G3 LABS LLC (77); 374 LABS LLC (8); DB LABS LLC (6). Dates: 2020-01-02 to 2023-10-03. 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 | 0.145 |
| CBN | 0 | 0 | 0.547 |
| Delta-9 THC | 0.757 | 0 | 6.151 |
| THCA | 19.384 | 6.282 | 29.524 |
| Total cannabinoids | 20.09 | 0 | 35.69 |
| Total THC | 18.42 | 8.68 | 32.04 |
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 | 0.003 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 #33 | 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 #33 | 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; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) | reported |
| CBDA | 0.2 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) | reported |
| THC | 17.9 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) | reported |
| THC (Δ9-THC) | 0.18 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 #33 | 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 |
| THCA | 18.8 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) | 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=191 samples; test dates 2020-01-02 to 2023-10-03; median of 129 samples with a value). Laboratory: NV CANN LABS LLC (100); G3 LABS LLC (77); 374 LABS LLC (8); DB LABS LLC (6). Dates: 2020-01-02 to 2023-10-03. 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 | 0.025 | 0 | 0.159 |
| alpha-Humulene | 0.122 | 0.005 | 0.537 |
| alpha-Pinene | 0.053 | 0.003 | 0.578 |
| beta-Caryophyllene | 0.267 | 0.048 | 0.973 |
| beta-Myrcene | 0.19 | 0.044 | 0.856 |
| beta-Pinene | 0.08 | 0.012 | 0.18 |
| Caryophyllene oxide | 0.001 | 0 | 0.064 |
| D-Limonene | 0.082 | 0.003 | 0.87 |
| Linalool | 0.047 | 0.001 | 0.157 |
| Terpinolene | 0.542 | 0.001 | 1.89 |
| Total terpenes | 1.54 | 0.33 | 5.78 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| beta-caryophyllene | 2.6 mg/g (mean; SD 0.7) | dataset | 9 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 | 0.7 mg/g (mean; SD 0.3) | dataset | 9 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 0.4) | dataset | 9 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 | 0.9 mg/g (mean; SD 0.4) | dataset | 9 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 | 0.9 mg/g (mean; SD 0.6) | dataset | 9 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 |
| terpinolene | 8.3 mg/g (mean; SD 3.0) | dataset | 9 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 |
| trans-ocimene | 1.1 mg/g (mean; SD 0.7) | dataset | 9 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 |
| Bisabolol | 0.013 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| 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 #33 | 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 | 0.023 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| 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 #33 | 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 | 0.039 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| Isopulegol | 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 #33 | 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 | 0.021 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| 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 #33 | 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) |
| p-Cymene | 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 #33 | 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) |
| trans-Nerolidol | 0.046 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| α-Bisabolol | 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 #33 | 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 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 #33 | 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 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 #33 | 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 | 0.369 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| β-Caryophyllene | 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 #33 | 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 | 0.132 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| 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 #33 | 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 | 0.612 % (as printed; w/w basis not stated) | dataset or batch (N and batch not reported in source) | Table 4 | not reported in source | not reported in source | not reported in source (Table 4 lists compounds analysed) |
| β-Pinene | 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 #33 | 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 #33 | 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=9 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.4 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) | 0.9 mg/g | dataset (N=9 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.4 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 | 0.9 mg/g | dataset (N=9 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 |
| Terpinolene | 8.3 mg/g | dataset (N=9 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 3.0 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 |
| trans-Ocimene | 1.1 mg/g | dataset (N=9 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.7 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 | 2.6 mg/g | dataset (N=9 samples from one California dispensary, Feb 2015-Feb 2016; mean, SD 0.7 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 | 0.7 mg/g | dataset (N=9 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 |
| Humulene | 1.4 mg/g | dataset (N=9 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.4) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=9) | 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 | 0.9 mg/g | dataset (N=9 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.4) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=9) | 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 |
| Myrcene | 0.9 mg/g | dataset (N=9 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.6) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=9) | 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 |
| Terpinolene | 8.3 mg/g | dataset (N=9 dried flower samples; mean, SD 3.0) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=9) | 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 |
| trans-Ocimene | 1.1 mg/g | dataset (N=9 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.7) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=9) | 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 | 2.6 mg/g | dataset (N=9 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.7) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=9) | 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 | 0.7 mg/g | dataset (N=9 dried flower samples; mean, SD 0.3) | dispensary samples pooled by cultivar name (n=9) | 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 |
Jack Herer is the name of a cannabis cultivar (commonly called a strain). This page separates what is documented from what is reported or marketed. It is information only. For how these pages are built, see how cultivar profiles work.
Evidence labels used here: marketing claim means a statement from sellers or media without independent testing; insufficient evidence means too little to judge; Proper evidence not found means we looked and found nothing usable.
Identity and reported lineage
The cultivar is named after Jack Herer, an American cannabis activist and author of The Emperor Wears No Clothes.[1] An encyclopedia entry on Herer says the strain was originally created by Sensi Seeds.[2] A cannabis news site places the first breeding by Sensi Seeds in the Netherlands.[3] Breeder attribution is therefore reported by secondary sources, and we did not read the breeder's own documentation.
Lineage is reported and uncertain. The same news site says Sensi Seeds has kept the recipe private and that Jack Herer is "said to be" a cross of Northern Lights #5, Shiva Skunk and Haze.[3] A strain encyclopedia describes a Haze hybrid combined with a Northern Lights #5 and Shiva Skunk cross.[1] The sources agree with each other, but they appear to repeat the same story and neither shows breeding records. Other names reported include "JH" and "The Jack."[1]
Many seed companies and growers sell their own versions under this name, so two products called Jack Herer may differ. A genetic study of dispensary samples found little genetic similarity among three samples sold as Jack Herer, with a similarity score of 0.10 on a scale where the study's strains ranged from about minus 0.22 to 0.68.[4] See cultivar names, aliases and naming conflicts.
Classification
Retail sources call Jack Herer a sativa-dominant strain.[1] The genetic study listed it at 55 percent sativa from a strain website, and found that its two genetic groups did not match the sativa, hybrid and indica labels.[4] A 55 percent figure is a marketing estimate and not a chemical measurement. See why indica and sativa labels do not reliably predict effects.
Cannabinoid dominance: the one laboratory dataset below included only high-THC samples (more than 10 percent THC by a lab method, individual results not shown), so Jack Herer samples there were THC-dominant.[5]
Appearance
We did not find a readable, non-promotional source with an appearance description, so none is given.
Aroma and measured terpenes
Reported flavors from a strain encyclopedia: pine, woody and earthy.[1] A news site describes a pine and skunky aroma and links it to humulene in some phenotypes (plant variants); that is a reported association and not a measurement.[3]
Measured data come from one California laboratory dataset of samples a single dispensary submitted between February 2015 and February 2016, tested by gas chromatography.[5] For nine samples labeled Jack Herer (milligrams per gram, mean plus or minus standard deviation), terpinolene was the largest terpene at 8.3 plus or minus 3.0, followed by beta-caryophyllene at 2.6 plus or minus 0.7, humulene at 1.4 plus or minus 0.4, trans-ocimene at 1.1 plus or minus 0.7, myrcene at 0.9 plus or minus 0.6 and limonene at 0.9 plus or minus 0.4.[5] The paper placed Jack Herer in a terpinolene-dominant group.[5] This is a multi-producer dataset, not one batch, and it is years old. Learn more at terpinolene and humulene.
Potency
Verified batch data was not available, and composition varies. The papers we read report terpenes or genetics for Jack Herer, not usable cannabinoid results. Seller percentages are not independent lab findings for a named batch, so none are repeated. See how to read a cannabis COA.
Reported experiences
Strain encyclopedia entries and reviewers describe Jack Herer as energetic, creative and uplifted.[1] This is consumer and editorial description. It is anecdote, not controlled research, and responses vary by person and batch.
Research
Proper evidence not found for clinical research on Jack Herer by name. We searched a biomedical literature index for the name with cannabis terms and found no human trial. A claim that it is a recognized medical cultivar in one country appears in a news article we read but we did not verify it against a regulator, so we do not repeat it as fact.[3] General pages such as THC do not validate this cultivar.
Safety
Cannabis can cause altered time perception and impaired thinking, memory and movement, and anxiety, panic or hallucinations are more likely with large amounts, strong products or little experience.[6] See impairment and driving and when to seek urgent help. In the US, call 911 in an emergency or Poison Help at 1-800-222-1222. Laws differ and change; see cannabis laws by country. This is not legal or medical advice.
Frequently asked questions
Who bred Jack Herer?
Secondary sources credit Sensi Seeds in the Netherlands.[2][3] We did not read the breeder's own records, so treat it as reported.
What is in Jack Herer's lineage?
Reported as Northern Lights #5, Shiva Skunk and Haze, but the recipe is not public.[3]
What are Jack Herer's main terpenes?
In one 2015 to 2016 California dataset, Jack Herer-labeled samples were terpinolene-dominant.[5] Other batches can differ.
What is Jack Herer's THC percentage?
Verified batch data was not available. Check each batch's own lab report.
References
- Leafly. Jack Herer Weed Strain Information (strain encyclopedia; secondary source). Read 2026-10-22.
- Wikipedia. Jack Herer (encyclopedia entry on the author and activist). Read 2026-10-22.
- The Cannigma. Jack Herer Marijuana Strain (cannabis news and education site; 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.
- 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.