SIDE-BY-SIDE FIELD NOTES
Grape Ape
vs Purple Urkle
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.
Grape Ape source ↗Purple Urkle source ↗
| Profile |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Classification | indica | indica |
| Breeder | Not verified | Not verified |
| THC · catalog reference | 18% | 19% |
| CBD · catalog reference | 0% | 0% |
| CBG · catalog reference | Not reported | Not reported |
| Dominant terpene | Myrcene | Myrcene |
| Terpenes | Myrcene, Pinene, Caryophyllene | Myrcene, Pinene, Caryophyllene |
| Aroma | Earthy / herbal, Pine, Pepper / spice | Earthy / herbal, Pine, Pepper / spice |
| Flavor | ||
| Reported effects | ||
| Reported negative effects | ||
| Reported parents | Not verified | Not verified |
| Lineage status | Ancestry documented | Disputed parentage |
| Ancestry components | Mendocino Purps (Ancestry component), Skunk (Ancestry component), Afghani (Ancestry component) | Not verified |
| Selected from | Not verified | Mendocino Purps (Phenotype selection · disputed) |
| Lineage notes | Grape Ape is associated with Apothecary Genetics and Barney’s Farm. Its reported background includes Mendocino Purps, Skunk and Afghani, without a fully specified crossing sequence. This is a source-reported identity, not a genetically authenticated pedigree. | Purple Urkle is associated with California and a proposed selection from Mendocino Purps. That origin is presented as a belief in the reference, so the selection link remains explicitly uncertain. |
| Source reports · whole profile | 2,274 | 1,345 |
Explore Grape Ape family ↗Explore Purple Urkle family ↗
Similarities
Shared documented terpenes: Myrcene, Pinene, Caryophyllene.
Main differences
The catalog lists THC at 18% for Grape Ape and 19% for Purple Urkle. 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.