In 2018, we received permits to grow and research cannabis (low THC/high CBD), and now we are broadening our research palette to include the needs and opportunities of the ever-growing cannabis industry.

This industry, due to legal hurdles and crippling stigmas, is somewhat deprived of scientific literature on many production practices and issues. Growers and industry professionals rely heavily on personal experience and information from other industries (e.g., floriculture and greenhouse science). Although hands-on experience is an invaluable source of knowledge, having scientific information to fall back on can greatly expedite the learning process for growers, both experienced and inexperienced. A specific area in need of information is that of container substrates.

Overview of Substrates & Soils

Substrates can be composed of organic or inorganic components, or a mixture of both, that create the container environment in which a plant will grow and thrive. Numerous organic and inorganic components have been used in container crop production over the years. One of the most important things to remember is that these materials are not “soil” and cannot (should not) be handled like soil. Unlike mineral soil (field soil) that can be stored anywhere for any length of time and moved with any heavy equipment, soilless components must be handled as little as possible and with care so they maintain their inherent physical structures and properties.

In the “2018 Growing Media Guide” research report published in Cannabis Business Times’ January issue, 73 percent of survey respondents stated that field soil was used in their growing media in some capacity, while 6 percent said it was their sole material for growing their crops. Many discussion points could be addressed in detail regarding the choice to use field soil in container production. While it may be cheap and easily available, it does offer potential barriers, issues and even missed opportunities.

Issues may include the material weight (which could present lifting difficulties for your employees), introduction of weeds or disease if not properly sterilized, challenging irrigation management, variable soil types and lessened root growth (compared to soilless culture). Missed opportunities may include the inability to be “precision growers,” meaning that during a crop production cycle, if there is a need to adjust water or nutrition to the crop quickly to slow or speed up growth, soil does not respond as readily as soilless mixes. One of the marvels of today’s greenhouse and floriculture professionals is their ability to leverage highly technical and precise monitoring and adjusting of crop inputs and environmental parameters that allow them to control plant growth (based on weather conditions, shipping date, size requirements, etc.). One of the main reasons they can do this is because of the engineered soilless substrates they use to grow their crops, which are highly responsive and easily adjusted.

Many questions, misconceptions and unknowns exist regarding the soilless components used in mixes. We caution readers to be careful where they receive their information not only about substrates, but also about all topics related to cannabis production. We highly encourage cultivators to rely on scientific literature whenever possible or consult with professionals whose information comes from science-based research and experience. Among the reasons we encourage this is that we often hear statements such as “perlite is toxic,” “peat is running out,” “coconut coir is local and more sustainable than peat.” (All three of these comments are 100-percent false, by the way.)

When searching information on the internet about a growing topic, I suggest following up your keywords with “PDF” in your search. This will narrow the scope of the information you find to typically more formal, scientific, published, etc., content compared to open forums, small grower or business websites trying to sell something, or online blogs where opinions flow freely, and facts are sometimes elusive. Google Scholar is also a good place to search for this type of content.

Substrate Diagnostics

In the spirit of elucidating those mysteries, let’s look at what makes for a good substrate for cannabis production.

Substrate quality begins at the source: the supplier. We highly encourage cultivators to choose a substrate supplier (there are many to choose from) and build a strong working relationship with them. When looking for a substrate supplier, do your homework and be prepared to ask questions about the products and their production needs. Ask about technical-support offerings in the event that a problem arises and you need assistance. Ask about product performance compared to other products or competitors’ products. Cost is important, of course, but that should not be the sole driving force behind the decision to choose one company or product over another. A higher-priced mix that comes with technical support and experienced grower experts is well worth the extra cost if problems arise or help is needed. As is true in many things in life, you get what you pay for.

Diagnostics & Testing

To help ensure substrate quality and performance—substrate manufacturers and university or independent laboratories offer a broad range of testing options, which give reliable and replicable indications of the performance of container substrates with respect to water, nutrition and physical, chemical and biological properties. Most methodologies used to develop tests for substrates over the past four decades have been adopted and modified from soil science analytical methods.

The tests noted in the sidebar are usually conducted as part of a product’s research and development (R&D), but they can also be conducted on substrates to identify problems that occur during production.

Ideally, someone at every growing operation should be responsible for checking every load of substrate that is delivered to ensure quality and consistency. If one person holds this responsibility, it improves the chances of catching inconsistencies and being confident that the substrates are correct. A visual inspection of the product should be conducted (not every bale/bag, but spot checking a few) to make sure it looks as it should (as it always has in the past). It can be helpful to keep a sample of “good substrate” from a previous delivery and use it to compare to future shipments for visual consistency. It is also vital that a few samples be taken and checked for pH and EC before crops are planted in the mix. These simple steps do not require much time (typically seconds to just a few minutes), but can offer grower confidence in product quality.

If problems or inconsistencies do occur, growers should contact their substrate suppliers for a technical consultation. This is one of the advantages of buying premixed substrates from suppliers: They have technical support that can help if problems arise. Growers who choose to make or blend their own mixes may have to find experts elsewhere to assist with the problems.

Laboratories, Research & Cannabis

Numerous professional laboratories across the country can be used for diagnostic testing of the substrate itself. A simple online search of “growing media analysis laboratory” will yield many results. Many universities have analytical labs as do many states in the U.S. through their Departments of Agriculture. Several independent labs are also available including PAT²H Horticultural Research Services, JR Peters Lab, MMI Labs and Waypoint Analytical.

Current and future understanding of cannabis-substrate interactions will increase drastically as more state (and private) institutions are legally permitted to research and study these crops.

Accurate and replicable grower trials and experimentation will also continue to provide reliable information about containerized cannabis production. Research does not have to be conducted in a laboratory. The perfect balance of science and application exists in grower and researcher partnerships, which has been the key to success for numerous other horticultural industries.

Dr. Brian E. Jackson is an associate professor and director of the Horticultural Substrates Laboratory at NCSU. He can be reached at Brian_Jackson@ncsu.edu.

J. Turner Smith is a graduate student in Substrate Science currently working at the Horticultural Substrate Laboratory and can be reached at jtsmit17@ncsu.edu.

Dr. Bill Fonteno is a professor and founder of the Horticultural Substrate Laboratory and can be reached at Bill_Fonteno@ncsu.edu.

Minnesota state representative Betty McCollum tweeted this comment on Aug. 4, highlighting the state’s expansion of qualifying conditions for its medical cannabis program. Source: Twitter

William Wrigley Jr., II, the great-grandson of Wrigley gum company founder William Wrigley, Jr., recently made the jump from candy to cannabis. He invested millions of dollars into Surterra Wellness, a medical cannabis startup in Georgia with licenses to operate in Florida and Texas, and took on the role of chairman with the company. Source: Bloomberg

David Martyn, president of Starbuds Canada and Compass Cannabis Clinic, says private retailers are chomping at the bit following reports that Ontario will allow cannabis to be sold in privately owned dispensaries despite no official word from the province’s new Conservative government. Source: CBC

With $32.12 million in combined sales in California, Colorado and Oregon, April 20 proved to be a sales bonanza. The next closest day (a Friday in June) only reached $18 million. 4/20 sales were more than double average sales for any other day between Jan. 1 and June 30, 2018.

These figures should come as no surprise as we know 4/20 drives sales. But what exactly were people buying?

California

California is the sales behemoth—consumers there spent $15.5 million on cannabis products on the industry holiday. This was the state’s first 4/20 with adult-use sales, and consumers dropped their dollars on all sorts of goodies.

Californians remained true to their form and crowned Blue Dream as queen of the day, followed by OG Kush and GG4. Among strain-specific flower, the average retail price hit $7.77/gram.

Edibles raked in $2 million on 4/20, with an average retail price of $15.32 per product. Gummies made up 30 percent of sales, while baked goods clocked in at 16 percent and dropper bottles at 15 percent.

Concentrates sold at more than twice the rate of edibles, with $4.8 million in sales and an average retail of $33 per product. Vapes ruled the roost, commanding 79 percent of sales, followed by live resin at 6 percent and wax at 4 percent.

Colorado

The nation’s second-largest market, Colorado, mirrored California in terms of the most popular strain. Blue Dream was the most purchased, followed by Golden Goat and OG Kush. With an average retail of $3.86/gram on 4/20, prices for flower were about half of California prices. Consumers spent $1.6 million on THC-infused snacks, baked goods and other edibles, and the average retail of $14.15 per product was only slightly less than California’s.

Edible sales in the state again mirrored California, with gummies taking the lead with 40 percent market share in that product category. But that’s where the similarities end: Chocolate bars grabbed 17 percent of sales and hard candy represented 7 percent.

In concentrates, Coloradans and Californians diverge sharply. In Colorado, which had $3.2 million in concentrates sales and an average retail price of $22.34 per product on 4/20, vape cartridges harnessed 34 percent of sales, wax grabbed 21 percent, live resin represented 19 percent and shatter rose to 17 percent.

Oregon

Oregon saw $985,000 in flower sales on 4/20 and crowned Purple Hindu Kush as the No. 1 strain. Blue Dream wasn’t far behind, taking second place in sales, followed by Dutch Treat. The average retail price in Oregon was $4.73/gram, a bit more than Colorado’s prices, but still significantly less than California’s.

Edibles hit $749,000 in sales, with an average retail of $14.23 per product—a mere 8 cents more than in Colorado.

Oregonians fell in line with the edibles trends seen in California and Colorado. As in the other states, gummies proved to be the most popular. Meanwhile, droppers came in second, followed by chocolate bars and baked goods.

4/20 concentrate sales in Oregon reached $1.45 million with an average retail price of $27.63 per product. Oregonians trended with Californians here, with vapes leading the way with 67 percent of sales, followed by shatter at 13 percent and live resin at 6 percent.

Douglas Brown is the owner of Contact High Communications. He can be reached at doug@contacthighco.com.

I was recently interviewed, along with Cam Battley, CCO of Canada-based Aurora Cannabis, by James West on “The Midas Letter,” a Canadian digital business channel for cannabis, crypto and technology stocks. (You can watch the interview at bit.ly/midas-letter.) It got me thinking about Aurora and its recent business dealings, including Aurora’s investment in and partnership with private-sector liquor retailer Alcanna. According to Aurora’s April announcement:

“The companies have reached a license agreement whereby Alcanna has been given exclusive rights to open retail cannabis stores under the brand name ‘Aurora’ across Canada. … In February, Aurora announced its strategic investment in Alcanna (formerly Liquor Stores NA), the Edmonton, Alberta-based retailer of alcoholic beverages with 229 retail outlets in Western Canada and Alaska, with a view to establishing a leading brand of cannabis retail outlets.”

Alcanna is one of the three largest private sector alcohol retailers in North America and by far the largest private sector alcohol retailer in Canada, according to an August press release issued by the company.

Aurora has a major distribution network behind it now—Alcanna has been dealing with regulatory issues around alcohol, which are as close as you can get to the cannabis market’s regulatory nuances, for many years. In fact, the expansion into the cannabis market drove Alcanna’s strategic name change—the new name combines alcohol and cannabis, as the company’s website explains.

“We have deep capabilities that will enable us to rapidly develop a large network of well-located cannabis stores, delivering a unique customer experience from October 17, 2018, onwards,” commented James Burns, Alcanna’s CEO, in the company’s August statement.

Aurora already established itself in the U.S. cannabis market and recently created a spin-off company, Australis, to house its American assets. Aurora has “a funded capacity in excess of 570,000 kg per year and sales and operations in 14 countries across five continents,” as stated in the Alcanna press release. No doubt Aurora and Alcanna will be rapidly expanding across the U.S. as soon as federal legalization occurs.

The U.S. federal prohibition on cannabis is enabling this to happen. By the time the U.S. government makes a sensible legislative move on cannabis—medical or adult-use—the U.S. will be so far behind the global cannabis companies that the catch-up period for most U.S.-based companies will be substantial. (Not to mention medical cannabis research and the money already flowing beyond our borders.)

If you are a U.S. grower, you might think it’s a blessing to have this period of federal prohibition to build your businesses, but other countries will see it as their blessing as well—more time to establish not only their own brands, but to facilitate deals such as the Aurora-Alcanna partnership and begin building a global production and distribution network.

The future of the cannabis industry holds room for every type and size of business. But if you don’t have one eye on what’s happening around you, you are likely to get swallowed up by the swelling wave of big business. Reality is reality, like it or not. Now is the time to think strategically about your place in the rapidly advancing global cannabis industry and to establish a foothold in your market(s).