| Literature DB >> 35848818 |
Stefania Porcu1, Enrica Tuveri2, Marco Palanca2, Claudia Melis2, Ignazio Macellaro La Franca2, Jessica Satta1, Daniele Chiriu1, Carlo Maria Carbonaro1, Pierluigi Cortis3, Antonio De Agostini3, Pier Carlo Ricci1.
Abstract
The need to find a rapid and worthwhile technique for the in situ detection of the content of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) in Cannabis sativa L. is an ever-increasing problem in the forensic field. Among all the techniques for the detection of cannabinoids, Raman spectroscopy can be identified as the most cost-effective, fast, noninvasive, and nondestructive. In this study, 42 different samples were analyzed using Raman spectroscopy with 1064 nm excitation wavelength. The use of an IR wavelength laser showed the possibility to clearly identify THC and CBD in fresh samples, without any further processing, knocking out the contribution of the fluorescence generated by visible and near-IR sources. The results allow assigning all the Raman features in THC- and CBD-rich natural samples. The multivariate analysis underlines the high reproducibility of the spectra and the possibility to distinguish immediately the Raman spectra of the two cannabinoid species. Furthermore, the ratio between the Raman bands at 1295/1440 and 1623/1663 cm-1 is identified as an immediate test parameter to evaluate the THC content in the samples.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35848818 PMCID: PMC9330313 DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.2c01629
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anal Chem ISSN: 0003-2700 Impact factor: 8.008
Scheme 1Subclasses of Cannabinoids Mainly Present in Cannabis Plants
Figure 1Raman spectrum of fresh inflorescence with 785 nm excitation wavelength.
Figure 2Raman spectra of CBD- and THC-rich plants, collected using 1064 nm laser excitation (sample 6 and sample 26, respectively in Table ).
GC-FID Results of the Analyzed Samples with the Corresponding Amounts of THC and CBD
| sample | % THC | % CBD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.60% | 0.30% |
| 2 | 1.90% | 0.27% |
| 3 | 6.90% | 0.30% |
| 4 | 7.78% | 0.25% |
| 5 | 10.49% | 0.29% |
| 6 | 7.41% | 0.21% |
| 7 | 6.42% | 0.24% |
| 8 | 6.42% | 0.24% |
| 9 | 8.42% | 0.27% |
| 10 | 6.23% | 0.26% |
| 11 | 8.61% | 0.22% |
| 12 | 5.80% | 0.21% |
| 13 | 4.14% | 0.21% |
| 14 | 3.61% | 0.29% |
| 15 | 2.02% | 0.09% |
| 16 | 4.34% | 0.13% |
| 17 | 3.68% | 0.17% |
| 18 | 4.12% | 0.13% |
| 19 | 3.01% | 0.11% |
| 20 | 3.35% | 0.11% |
| 21 | 3.56% | 0.10% |
| 22 | 5.11% | 0.18% |
| 23 | 4.15% | 0.15% |
| 24 | 3.20% | 0.17% |
| 25 | 7.49% | 0.24% |
| 26 | 0.45% | 10.80% |
| 27 | 0.45% | 10.80% |
| 28 | 0.26% | 5.22% |
| 29 | 0.29% | 5.48% |
| 30 | 0.19% | 3.53% |
| 31 | 0.33% | 6.26% |
| 32 | 0.33% | 6.53% |
| 33 | 0.23% | 4.54% |
| 34 | 2.87 | 5.69 |
| 35 | 0.55 | 6.49 |
| 36 | 0.60 | 8.61 |
| 37 | 1.28 | 13.80 |
| 38 | 1.58 | 14.07 |
| 39 | 0.99 | 10.89 |
| 40 | 1.45 | 12.46 |
| 41 | 1.30 | 10.62 |
| 42 | 0.90 | 9.51 |
Figure 3Optical microscopy images of CBD- and THC-rich plants.
Figure 4Raman spectrum of leaves collected using 1064 nm laser excitation.
Figure 5Principal component for the THC-rich plants compared with a single spectrum of a plant of the same family.
Figure 6Principal component for the CBD-rich plants compared with a single spectrum of a plant of the same family.
Figure 7Mean of the ratio between 1295/1440 and 1623/1663 cm–1 peaks for the THC-rich samples.
Figure 8Mean of the ratio between 1295/1440 and 1623/1663 cm–1 peaks for the CBD-rich samples.
Figure 9Comparison of Raman spectra of ground mixed sample and fresh inflorescence.