Debates over Cannabis sativa L. and C. indica Lam. center on their taxonomic circumscription and rank. This perennial puzzle has been compounded by the viral spread of a vernacular nomenclature, “Sativa” and “Indica,” which does not correlate with C. sativa and C. indica. Ambiguities also envelop the epithets of wild-type Cannabis: the spontanea versus ruderalis debate (i.e., vernacular “Ruderalis”), as well as another pair of Cannabis epithets, afghanica and kafirstanica. To trace the rise of vernacular nomenclature, we begin with the protologues (original descriptions, synonymies, type specimens) of C. sativa and C. indica. Biogeographical evidence (obtained from the literature and herbarium specimens) suggests 18th–19th century botanists were biased in their assignment of these taxa to field specimens. This skewed the perception of Cannabis biodiversity and distribution. The development of vernacular “Sativa,” “Indica,” and “Ruderalis” was abetted by twentieth century botanists, who ignored original protologues and harbored their own cultural biases. Predominant taxonomic models by Vavilov, Small, Schultes, de Meijer, and Hillig are compared and critiqued. Small’s model adheres closest to protologue data (with C. indica treated as a subspecies). “Sativa” and “Indica” are subpopulations of C. sativa subsp. indica; “Ruderalis” represents a protean assortment of plants, including C. sativa subsp. sativa and recent hybrids.

中文翻译：

---

大麻分类模型、文化偏见以及科学名称和白话名称之间的冲突

关于 Cannabis sativa L. 和 C. indica Lam 的辩论。以它们的分类范围和等级为中心。这个长期存在的谜团因与 C. sativa 和 C. indica 无关的白话命名法“Sativa”和“Indica”的病毒传播而更加复杂。含糊不清也包含野生型大麻的加词：spontanea 与 ruderalis 的争论（即白话“Ruderalis”），以及另一对大麻加词 afghanica 和 kafirstanica。为了追踪白话命名法的兴起，我们从 C. sativa 和 C. indica 的原始描述（原始描述、同义词、模式标本）开始。生物地理学证据（从文献和植物标本馆标本中获得）表明 18 至 19 世纪的植物学家在将这些分类群分配给野外标本时存在偏见。这扭曲了对大麻生物多样性和分布的看法。白话“苜蓿”、“籼稻”和“籼稻”的发展受到了 20 世纪植物学家的怂恿，他们无视原始原始物并怀有自己的文化偏见。比较和批评了 Vavilov、Small、Schultes、de Meijer 和 Hillig 的主要分类模型。Small 的模型最接近原始数据（将 C. indica 视为亚种）。“Sativa”和“Indica”是 C. sativa subsp. 的亚群。籼稻; “Ruderalis”代表了种类繁多的植物，包括 C. sativa subsp。苜蓿和最近的杂交种。比较和批评了 Vavilov、Small、Schultes、de Meijer 和 Hillig 的主要分类模型。Small 的模型最接近原始数据（将 C. indica 视为亚种）。“Sativa”和“Indica”是 C. sativa subsp. 的亚群。籼稻; “Ruderalis”代表了种类繁多的植物，包括 C. sativa subsp。苜蓿和最近的杂交种。比较和批评了 Vavilov、Small、Schultes、de Meijer 和 Hillig 的主要分类模型。Small 的模型最接近原始数据（将 C. indica 视为亚种）。“Sativa”和“Indica”是 C. sativa subsp. 的亚群。籼稻; “Ruderalis”代表了种类繁多的植物，包括 C. sativa subsp。苜蓿和最近的杂交种。