Re the reading within the calibration range. Quality control samples (3 different cannabinoid mixture levels) were incorporated into each HPLC run to ensure the validity of the data collected.Cannabis Potency in AustraliaAccuracy (average bias = 4.2 ) and precision (average coefficient of variation (CV) = 3.8 ) were all within acceptable confidence limits. Recovery efficiency was further validated from re-extracted powder samples. The following cannabinoids were analysed: D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabigerol (CBG), cannabichromene (CBC), cannabinol (CBN) and tetrahydrocannabivarin (THC-V); in addition, the carboxylic acid precursor molecular forms of D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-A), cannabidiol (CBD-A) and cannabigerol (CBG-A), which are more plentiful in raw plant material, were also quantified. The HPLC system 86168-78-7 chemical information consisted of a Shimadzu ADVP module (Kyoto, Japan) equipped with a SIL-10 autoinjector with sample cooler and LC-10 in-line vacuum degassing solvent delivery unit. Chromatographic separation of all cannabinoids and internal standard (IS) diazepam was accomplished on a Waters X-Bridge C18 (4.6 mm6150 mm, 3.5 micron) reverse-phase column (Waters, Australia) coupled with a 1 mm Opti-Guard C18 precolumn (Optimize Technologies, Alpha Resources, Thornleigh, ?Australia) maintained at 25C by a Shimadzu CTO-10AS column oven (Kyoto, Japan). The linear gradient solutions consisted of mobile phase (A) 50 mM ammonium formate buffer pH 3.75 with 10 acetonitrile, and (B) 90 acetronitrile, with the following elution program utilised, 0 min, 70 B; 15 min, 90 B; 30 min, 90 B; 31 min, 70 B and 40 min 70 . The flow rate was maintained at 1 ml/ min. The eluate from the column was monitored at 272 nm via SPD-M20A diode array detector (Kyoto, Japan). The injection volume of reconstituted extract was 5 ml. Chromatographic control, data collection and processing were carried out using Shimadzu Class VP data software (version 7.4, Kyoto, Japan). Quantitation of unknown concentrations of cannabinoids and control samples were obtained from the linear regression equation of calibration curves of individual reference standards by plotting concentration versus the area ratio of the standard and internal standard. Control and representative chromatograms are shown in 23148522 Figure 1. All analyses were conducted with two separate extracts of each individual sample. Individual cannabinoid values are expressed as w/w . In addition to the 9 cannabinoid values quantified (above), we also calculated the total content of THC (THCtot), CBD (CBDtot) and CBG (CBGtot), using formulae which adjusted for the differing molecular weight of the cannabinoid and carboxylic conjugative components of each cannabinoid [32]: THCtot THCzTHC{A ?(314:46=358:47) CBDtot CBDzCBD{A ?(314:46=358:47) CBGtot CBGzCBG{A ?(316:48=360:48)outliers were detected and thus no values were excluded from analysis. Descriptive statistics (w/w : mean, median and range) are presented for each cannabinoid analysed for both the Cannabis Cautioning and Known Provenance samples. Differences in cannabinoid content between urban and rural seizure locations (in the Cannabis Cautioning samples) and between indoor- 1676428 and outdoor-grown seizures (in the Known Provenance samples) were analysed using t-tests for normally distributed variables and the non-parametric Median test for skewed distributions. Each of these sets of analyses was adjusted for MedChemExpress SR 3029 multiple testing using Bonferroni adjustment.Re the reading within the calibration range. Quality control samples (3 different cannabinoid mixture levels) were incorporated into each HPLC run to ensure the validity of the data collected.Cannabis Potency in AustraliaAccuracy (average bias = 4.2 ) and precision (average coefficient of variation (CV) = 3.8 ) were all within acceptable confidence limits. Recovery efficiency was further validated from re-extracted powder samples. The following cannabinoids were analysed: D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabigerol (CBG), cannabichromene (CBC), cannabinol (CBN) and tetrahydrocannabivarin (THC-V); in addition, the carboxylic acid precursor molecular forms of D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-A), cannabidiol (CBD-A) and cannabigerol (CBG-A), which are more plentiful in raw plant material, were also quantified. The HPLC system consisted of a Shimadzu ADVP module (Kyoto, Japan) equipped with a SIL-10 autoinjector with sample cooler and LC-10 in-line vacuum degassing solvent delivery unit. Chromatographic separation of all cannabinoids and internal standard (IS) diazepam was accomplished on a Waters X-Bridge C18 (4.6 mm6150 mm, 3.5 micron) reverse-phase column (Waters, Australia) coupled with a 1 mm Opti-Guard C18 precolumn (Optimize Technologies, Alpha Resources, Thornleigh, ?Australia) maintained at 25C by a Shimadzu CTO-10AS column oven (Kyoto, Japan). The linear gradient solutions consisted of mobile phase (A) 50 mM ammonium formate buffer pH 3.75 with 10 acetonitrile, and (B) 90 acetronitrile, with the following elution program utilised, 0 min, 70 B; 15 min, 90 B; 30 min, 90 B; 31 min, 70 B and 40 min 70 . The flow rate was maintained at 1 ml/ min. The eluate from the column was monitored at 272 nm via SPD-M20A diode array detector (Kyoto, Japan). The injection volume of reconstituted extract was 5 ml. Chromatographic control, data collection and processing were carried out using Shimadzu Class VP data software (version 7.4, Kyoto, Japan). Quantitation of unknown concentrations of cannabinoids and control samples were obtained from the linear regression equation of calibration curves of individual reference standards by plotting concentration versus the area ratio of the standard and internal standard. Control and representative chromatograms are shown in 23148522 Figure 1. All analyses were conducted with two separate extracts of each individual sample. Individual cannabinoid values are expressed as w/w . In addition to the 9 cannabinoid values quantified (above), we also calculated the total content of THC (THCtot), CBD (CBDtot) and CBG (CBGtot), using formulae which adjusted for the differing molecular weight of the cannabinoid and carboxylic conjugative components of each cannabinoid [32]: THCtot THCzTHC{A ?(314:46=358:47) CBDtot CBDzCBD{A ?(314:46=358:47) CBGtot CBGzCBG{A ?(316:48=360:48)outliers were detected and thus no values were excluded from analysis. Descriptive statistics (w/w : mean, median and range) are presented for each cannabinoid analysed for both the Cannabis Cautioning and Known Provenance samples. Differences in cannabinoid content between urban and rural seizure locations (in the Cannabis Cautioning samples) and between indoor- 1676428 and outdoor-grown seizures (in the Known Provenance samples) were analysed using t-tests for normally distributed variables and the non-parametric Median test for skewed distributions. Each of these sets of analyses was adjusted for multiple testing using Bonferroni adjustment.

Re the reading within the calibration range. Quality control samples (3 different

About author

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.