Gorilla Glue and Beach Crasher: two lineages, seven producers, common leading terpene

• Profile. Both strains are led by caryophyllene, so their leading terpene does not distinguish them.
• Availability. No producer supplies both, so the availability of each depends on a different delivery.
• Origin. The lineage of both is established.
• What this table does not say. It does not include the declared content as a single number or price. Which strain is suitable for whom is determined by the attending physician, not by the feature comparison.

What do these two strains really differ in?

Lineage and list of producers. Gorilla Glue was created by crossing three strains, Beach Crasher by two, and the pedigree chart does not connect this pair with any common ancestor. Seven producers supply them to Polish pharmacies, and none of them stands on both sides of the comparison. However, they have the same leading terpene.

The Leafly entry for Original Glue, the strain previously known as Gorilla Glue #4, lists Chem’s Sister, Sour Dubb, and Chocolate Diesel as parent strains, and names Lone Watty and Joesy Whales from GG Strains as breeders. The three parent names in this collection are rare: out of sixty established lineages, fifty-three describe a cross of two strains, five of three, and two of four.

The name itself has a separate history and explains the confusion in records. The glue manufacturer of that name sued the breeder in 2017, and the settlement required the breeder to abandon the name and monkey graphics, which is why in breeding materials the strain is now referred to as GG4 or Original Glue. The Polish registry retained the former name, and the pedigree chart records it in two entries at once, once with the number and once without.

Beach Crasher has a shorter lineage directly from the breeder: the Jungle Boys information card lists the cross of Wedding Crasher with the Tk Bx1 line, where the abbreviation Bx1 means the first backcross with the parent strain. None of the five names on the parent side of this pair is available in Polish pharmacies, so the lineage difference cannot be checked at the counter, only in the breeder’s description.

What connects them?

The leading terpene, seven names in the ingredient list, and the state of data. For both strains, two Polish sources differ in composition, both have genetics described once as hybrid and once as hybrid-indica, and the THC content in both cases is gathered from the declarations of several separate registry entries, not from one.

Caryophyllene leads the profile of thirty out of eighty-five cultivars in this cluster, so the community of the leading terpene is not a rare coincidence here, but the most common arrangement in the entire collection. Besides Beach Crasher, the same name at the head of the profile is shared by twenty-eight other cultivars available in Polish pharmacies, so it does not distinguish this pair from anything.

The terpene lists overlap on seven names: bisabolol, humulene, caryophyllene, limonene, linalool, myrcene, and pinene are present in the profile of both strains. Beach Crasher has one more name in the list, nerolidol, and that is the entire difference at the level of the ingredient list itself.

The state of knowledge about both profiles is also common. Neither of the two sources confirms what the other provides, so we are comparing two disputed descriptions, not two established compositions. The pedigree chart does not add anything to this list: the parent collections of both strains have no common part, and neither appears in the lineage of the other.

Why does the same leading terpene not mean the same effect?

Because the leading terpene is one name taken from the entire list, not the composition. It only says that it came out highest in one comparison. The rest of the profile, the order of the remaining names, and the method of calculating shares diverge between the entries of this pair enough that no conclusion about consistent effects can be drawn from it.

The shares provided by Polish databases have no denominator. Nine registry entries of this pair described in the budcare.pl database give share sums from 64 to 100, and the Gorilla Glue entries stretch from 64 to 98. The spread does not arise from the difference between strains, but from the method of counting itself, and that is why there is not a single number next to the ingredient name in this text.

In one of the entries, S-LAB even has two fields of the same entry diverging: the share table lists an ingredient that is not in the terpene list of the same entry. This is not a defect of a single record, but a picture of how much weight a number taken from such a description carries.

For the comparison of the two strains, this results in one conclusion. The consistency of the name at the head of the profile is consistency at the label level, not at the composition level. Two entries of the same strain, introduced by two producers, can have different lists, so a common leading terpene does not entitle one to say that Gorilla Glue and Beach Crasher do the same thing.

Where does the THC declaration range for each of these strains come from?

From several separate registry entries, not from one declaration. Each producer declares its own nominal value, and the allowable deviation operates only around it. The range given for the strain thus includes the lower end of the weakest entry and the upper end of the strongest, and there is no packaging covering the entire range in any pharmacy.

For Gorilla Glue, the THC content falls within the range of 18.0-26.4%, composed of four different values declared by four producers. This range is unique in the collection: among sixty-nine cultivars for which it could be established, it does not repeat even once, and its spread is the largest in the entire comparison and nearly twice as wide as the median of the others.

Beach Crasher stands on the opposite side of the same measure. The THC content range given for it is 16.2-24.2% and is the most common range in the collection: it shares it with fourteen other cultivars, arises from two nominal values, and is four-tenths of a point narrower than that of Gorilla Glue.

The conclusion from this is more cautious than the number on the label suggests. The range describes the declarations of producers, not the content in a specific package, and says nothing about how the strain works. The first section of this comparison does not place lineage and producer before the percentage for nothing: if the only difference in the pair were the declared potency, this pair would have no reason to exist.

Who supplies each of these strains to Polish pharmacies?

Seven producers, with none supplying both. Gorilla Glue reaches pharmacies from four entities, Beach Crasher from three, and both lists are mutually exclusive. The number of registry entries is the same, four for each strain, so the difference lies in who introduces them, not in their number.

Behind this list lies a difference in scale. The four entities supplying Gorilla Glue have a total of eleven cultivars from this cluster, while the three entities supplying Beach Crasher have forty. These two collections also have no common part: not a single cultivar in the entire cluster is introduced simultaneously by a producer from the first and the second list.

Availability changes faster than the description of the strain. Among the nine entries of this pair described in the budcare.pl database, some are marked as unavailable, and one, on the Gorilla Glue side, is marked as withdrawn. What is currently on the pharmacy shelf is checked in the list of currently available strains, not in the strain description.

Separate pages for both strains outline these versions in order. The profile of Gorilla Glue collects four entries from four producers, while the profile of Beach Crasher collects four entries from three.

How long does it take for each strain to take effect?

This is determined by the route of administration, not by the choice between these two strains. Neither has its own pharmacokinetic study, so only the ranges described for inhaled and oral administration of the herb in general can be honestly provided. The following paragraph is common for the entire cluster.

The route of administration determines the course more than the strain itself. After vaporization, the substance passes from the lungs to the blood almost immediately, so the first sensations appear after a few minutes, the intensity increases for another ten to thirty minutes, and the whole effect lasts for two to four hours. After ingestion, the material first passes through the intestine and liver, so the first sensations are waited for from half an hour to two, and the episode lasts six, sometimes eight hours. Hence the most common mistake in oral administration: those who think nothing is happening after thirty minutes and take another dose will receive both doses at once. The above ranges describe the route of administration, not this strain; no pharmacokinetic study for a single cultivar has been published.

For the comparison of the two strains, this has one consequence. The difference in feeling after Gorilla Glue and after Beach Crasher, if someone describes it, cannot be derived from the course over time, because this course is the same for both. The attending physician determines the method of administration, not the strain description or the comparison of two names.

What is known, and what is not known about the effects of both strains?

Nothing that would pertain exclusively to one of them. The evidence is the same for both sides, as both are led by the same name in the profile, and both studies concern caryophyllene administered to animals, not the herb or the cultivar. The rest of the descriptions circulating online are patient reports or manufacturer material.

The first of the two studies: Gertsch J, Leonti M, Raduner S, Racz I, Chen JZ, Xie XQ, Altmann KH, Karsak M, Zimmer A, 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), PMID:18574142. Study model: mouse (in vivo) and test tube (receptor binding, human cells). (E)-caryophyllene selectively bound to the CB2 receptor (Ki = 155 nM) and inhibited paw swelling induced by carrageenan in wild-type mice, but not in CB2 receptor-deficient mice (Cnr2-/-), indicating a CB2-dependent mechanism; the study did not include any anxiety tests.

The second: Klauke AL, Racz I, Pradier B, Markert A, Zimmer AM, Gertsch J, Zimmer A, 2014, European Neuropsychopharmacology, PMID:24210682. Study model: rodent (mouse). Oral caryophyllene reduced the late inflammatory phase of pain in the formalin test in a CB2 receptor-dependent manner, with no effect on the early phase; in a neuropathic pain model, it alleviated thermal hyperalgesia and mechanical allodynia without developing tolerance with chronic administration.

The boundary of both results is described by one sentence, sounding the same for both Gorilla Glue and Beach Crasher, because the evidence base is common for them. In neither of the two studies was caryophyllene tested on humans or in inhaled form from the herb; both studies concern oral or systemic administration in mice in pain and inflammation models, not sleep or mood.

Outside of studies, what Polish registry databases report is assigned to both strains as having relaxing effects, and some entries for Gorilla Glue also as balanced. These are labels from commercial descriptions, not measurement results, and there is no study involving patients behind them. Separating these two orders is more important in comparison than in a single strain, because the comparison tempts one to transfer a conclusion from one side to the other.

What side effects have been reported for each of these two strains?

None that could be attributed to either of them individually. Reports in Poland go to the medicinal product with a batch number, not to the strain name, so there is no separate number for either Gorilla Glue or Beach Crasher. The following description pertains to cannabis herb as a group of raw materials.

Reports of side effects are collected for the medicinal product with a batch number, not for the strain name, so the following pertains to cannabis herb as a group of raw materials. The most commonly reported are dry mouth, red eyes, and increased heart rate. Less frequently described are dizziness upon rapid standing, daytime drowsiness, and temporary worsening of short-term memory, as well as anxiety increasing with dosage. A separate issue is medications taken concurrently, especially sedatives and those affecting coagulation: their assessment requires knowledge of the entire list of preparations, not the description of the plant. We do not provide the frequency of these symptoms numerically, as public collections for cannabis herb in Poland do not separate them by individual products.

The difference in the number of reports would not be evidence of a difference in safety, even if someone kept such a number for both names. Beach Crasher is introduced by three producers with large portfolios, Gorilla Glue by four with small ones, so patient exposure is different on both sides and unknown in size.

Frequently asked questions about this pair of strains

Are Gorilla Glue and Beach Crasher related?

No. The pedigree chart maintained for this cluster does not indicate any common ancestor of both strains, and neither stands in the lineage of the other. Gorilla Glue is, however, the parent of three other cultivars present in Polish pharmacies, while Beach Crasher is not the parent of any.

Does a common leading terpene mean that both strains work the same?

No. The leading terpene is one name from the list, not the entire composition, and leads in the profile of thirty out of eighty-five cultivars in this cluster. Besides it, the profiles of both strains are divided by one name, and individual registry entries of the same strain are divided by even more.

Why do we provide THC content as a range, not a single number?

Because the range is gathered here from the declarations of several separate registry entries, each of which has its own nominal value and allowable deviation. For Gorilla Glue, there are four such declarations, for Beach Crasher, two. A single number would suggest a measurement of content in a specific package, and that is not present in this data.

Which of the two terpene profiles is better documented?

None. For both strains, two Polish sources differ in composition: for Gorilla Glue, two names appear only in one of them, for Beach Crasher, three. This means we are comparing two disputed descriptions, not two established profiles.

Does either of these strains have its own clinical study?

No. Both studies referenced in this comparison concern caryophyllene administered to animals, not the herb from a specific cultivar and not patients. Neither Gorilla Glue nor Beach Crasher has had a study published involving humans.

Is the herb sold in stores without a prescription the same product?

No. The store herb category includes hemp herb sold without a prescription, with THC content below the legal threshold, meaning a different shelf than both strains described above, which are pharmaceutical raw materials dispensed by a doctor’s prescription.

Cannabis herb is a pharmaceutical raw material dispensed by a doctor’s prescription in the Rpw category. The material is informational and does not replace the advice of a doctor or pharmacist. Editorial text: ubucha.