## 3 Results
### Terpenes
#### 3.2.3 Interactions between Strains and Flower Positions  
The interactions between strains and flower positions revealed significant differences for the terpen \(\beta\)-myrcene, ocimene, limonene, cyanophyllene, camphene and \(\beta\)-pinene (Figure 7). A similar trend for \(\beta\)-myrcene and ocimene was found across flower positions for A4 and KAN. KAN displayed the highest concentration of \(\beta\)-myrcene, with 256.40 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\) in the MTBs, which differed significantly compared to the STBs (140.99 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) and SBs (58.92 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) (Figure 7a). In contrast, in A4, both the MTBs (97.85) and STBs (109.64) exhibited nearly the same concentrations, with significant reductions in the SBs. Comparing strains, KAN showed a significantly higher concentration of \(\beta\)-myrcene than A4, followed by E19. The same significant concentration gradient in the flower positions was also evident for KAN regarding ocimene, with the MTBs containing a 61% higher concentration than the STBs. A4 showed the highest concentration in the MTBs and STBs, with the MTBs producing 220% more than the SBs. No significant differences could be found between the flower positions at E19. In the case of limonene, however, E19 (65.49 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) produced significantly higher amounts than A4 (43.31 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)), while KAN (5.38 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) had the lowest concentrations (Figure 7c). The strain A4 exhibited the same trend across flower positions as \(\beta\)-myrcene and ocimene, with similar concentrations in the MTBs (69.44 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) and STBs (67.27 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)), which were significantly higher than in the SBs (31.64 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)). A different distribution was found for E19, with the highest concentration in the MTBs (65.49 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)), which was significantly different from that for the STBs (32.13 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)). The concentration of cyanophyllene was around 64.97 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\), equally distributed across all flower positions, for A4 (Figure 7d). On the other hand, E19 had a significantly heterogeneous allocation in the order MTBs (168.01 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) > SBs (103.32 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) > STBs (59.46 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)). The strain KAN displayed the same pattern as for limonene, with a significantly higher concentration in the MTBs (45.92 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) compared to the other flower positions. The concentrations of camphene displayed a very similar pattern across flower positions to cyanophyllene for the strains A4 and E19 (Figure 6e). Still, the STBs of A4 were revealed to have significantly more camphene (8.50 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) than the SBs  
Figure 6: Concentrations (\(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) of \(\beta\)-myrcene (**a**) and ocimene (**b**) for the different flower positions (MTB: main top bud, SBs: side buds, STBs: side top buds) under the three light spectra (SOL, AP67 and CHD). Means covered by at least one identical letter did not differ significantly, as indicated by a Tukey test (\(\alpha\) = 0.05). Lowercase letters indicate comparisons between flower positions within light spectra; uppercase letters indicate comparisons between light spectra within flower positions. Error bars indicate the standard errors of the means (\(n\) = 3). (5.89 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)). As for caryophyllene, E19 had a significantly more heterogeneous distribution in the order MTBs (21.11 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) > SBs (10.09 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) > STBs (6.70 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)). A distinct camphene-specific pattern was found for KAN, with significant differences in the order STBs (15.96 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) >MTBs (4.95 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)) > SBs (1.42 \(\upmu\)g g DW\({}^{-1}\)). \(\upbeta\)-pinene, as well, had a similar distribution across all flower positions comparable to caryophyllene.