AN INDEPENDENT GUIDE TO CANNABIS KNOWLEDGE Information, with context.
CannabisAtlasFIELD NOTES / VOL. 01
SIDE-BY-SIDE FIELD NOTES

Blackberry Kush
vs Bubba Kush

Leafly catalog summary values, not laboratory results for a specific sample. A displayed 0% is a rounded source value, not proof of absence. Unlisted cannabinoids remain unknown. Report totals are not per-effect sample sizes.
Profile
Illustrative cannabis photo from Leafly; not a verified Blackberry Kush specimen
Illustrative photo: Leafly
Blackberry Kush ↗
bubba kush — photo from Leafly
Photo: Leafly
Bubba Kush ↗
Classificationindicaindica
BreederNot verifiedNot verified
THC · catalog reference17%17%
CBD · catalog reference0%0%
CBG · catalog referenceNot reportedNot reported
Dominant terpeneCaryophylleneCaryophyllene
TerpenesCaryophyllene, Limonene, MyrceneCaryophyllene, Limonene, Myrcene
AromaPepper / spice, Citrus, Earthy / herbalPepper / spice, Citrus, Earthy / herbal
Flavor
Reported effects
Reported negative effects
Reported parentsAfghani (Reported parent), Blackberry (Reported parent)OG Kush (Reported parent · disputed), Bubba (unidentified indica) (Reported parent · disputed)
Lineage statusReported parentageDisputed parentage
Ancestry componentsNot verifiedNot verified
Selected fromNot verifiedNot verified
Lineage notesBlackberry Kush, also called BBK, is reported as an Afghani and Blackberry cross. The source associates its aroma with both berry and fuel-like descriptors. This is a source-reported identity, not a genetically authenticated pedigree.OG Kush and an unidentified indica called Bubba are reported. The suggestion that Bubba was Northern Lights is unresolved, so no Northern Lights parent link is asserted.
Source reports · whole profile2,0663,644

Similarities

Shared documented terpenes: Caryophyllene, Limonene, Myrcene.

Main differences

The catalog lists THC at 17% for Blackberry Kush and 17% for Bubba Kush. These reference points do not establish a sample range or an individual product's potency.

Keep the context

Reported attributes are subjective. Classification and chemical similarity do not establish equivalent effects.

Start another comparison →