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

Gelato #33
vs Jealousy

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 Gelato #33 specimen
Illustrative photo: Leafly
Gelato #33 ↗
Jealousy — photo from Leafly
Photo: Leafly
Jealousy ↗
Classificationhybridhybrid
BreederNot verifiedSeed Junky Genetics
THC · catalog reference20%25%
CBD · catalog reference0%Not reported
CBG · catalog referenceNot reported1%
Dominant terpeneCaryophylleneNot verified
TerpenesCaryophyllene, Limonene, MyrceneCaryophyllene, Limonene, Myrcene
AromaPepper / spice, Citrus, Earthy / herbalPepper / spice, Citrus, Earthy / herbal
Flavor
Reported effects
Reported negative effects
Reported parentsNot verifiedSherbert Bx1 (Reported parent), Gelato #41 (Reported parent)
Lineage statusPhenotype selectionReported parentage
Ancestry componentsNot verifiedNot verified
Selected fromGelato (Phenotype selection)Not verified
Lineage notesGelato #33 is a numbered selection from the Gelato family. Its family background is Sherbert with Thin Mint GSC; the selection link keeps it distinct from the general Gelato record. This is a source-reported identity, not a genetically authenticated pedigree.Jealousy is attributed to Seed Junky Genetics. Its reported parents are Sherbert Bx1 and Gelato 41; the backcross and numbered selection are preserved as distinct parent identities. This is a source-reported identity, not a genetically authenticated pedigree.
Source reports · whole profile417399

Similarities

Shared documented terpenes: Caryophyllene, Limonene, Myrcene.

Main differences

The catalog lists THC at 20% for Gelato #33 and 25% for Jealousy. 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 →