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

Sour Dubb
vs The Soap

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 Sour Dubb specimen
Illustrative photo: Leafly
Sour Dubb ↗
Illustrative cannabis photo from Leafly; not a verified The Soap specimen
Illustrative photo: Leafly
The Soap ↗
Classificationhybridhybrid
BreederNot verifiedNot verified
THC · catalog reference25%24%
CBD · catalog referenceNot reportedNot reported
CBG · catalog reference1%1%
Dominant terpeneNot verifiedCaryophyllene
TerpenesLimonene, Linalool, CaryophylleneCaryophyllene, Limonene, Linalool
AromaCitrus, Floral, Pepper / spicePepper / spice, Citrus, Floral
Flavor
Reported effects
Reported negative effects

No sourced reports yet.

Reported parentsECSD (Reported parent · disputed), Sour Bubble (Reported parent · disputed)Animal Mints (Reported parent), Kush Mints (Reported parent)
Lineage statusDisputed parentageReported parentage
Ancestry componentsNot verifiedNot verified
Selected fromNot verifiedNot verified
Lineage notesSour Dubb has uncertain clone-only origins. Leafly proposes East Coast Sour Diesel with Sour Bubble and separately describes a B.O.G. Seeds recreation using a different Sour Diesel line. This is a source-reported identity, not a genetically authenticated pedigree.The cited catalog page does not establish a complete, authenticated immediate-parent cross for this entry.
Source reports · whole profile32161

Similarities

Shared documented terpenes: Limonene, Linalool, Caryophyllene.

Main differences

The catalog lists THC at 25% for Sour Dubb and 24% for The Soap. 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 →