Getting started

One shelf, three groups

On this page11

The measurement Identical, not similar The cause is in how the index is built Which is defensible for some of it And indefensible for the rest So a buyer browsing three categories sees one This is a known limit rather than a hidden one What distinguishes the three properties is the writing Which is the honest way round Fixing it is an index change References

Identical down to a stray deodorant container. 19 leaves, one shelf.

The measurement

Our three cannabis groups, edibles, concentrates and flower, and adjacent botanicals, return the same 97 containers and 260 closures.

Identical, not similar

Same counts, same families, same colors, same neck finishes. Including one deodorant container that has no business in any of the three.

The cause is in how the index is built

A packaging archetype is assigned at the spoke level and inherited downward. All three of these spokes resolve to the same archetype, so all three get the same shelf.

Which is defensible for some of it

A wide-mouth jar in glass or PP at 30 to 500 mL genuinely does serve a gummy, a flower jar and a kava powder. The format is the same format.

And indefensible for the rest

A shatter jar wants a very different interior from a brownie jar, and a kratom tub is a bulk container rather than a dosed one. Our index does not know the difference.

So a buyer browsing three categories sees one

Which is worth knowing before you conclude the shelf is tailored. It is not tailored; it is one archetype serving nineteen leaves.

This is a known limit rather than a hidden one

An archetype assigned per spoke has no way to route two leaves of the same spoke to different shelves. The same note appears in the reloading property, where two leaves should not have had a shelf at all.

What distinguishes the three properties is the writing

Edibles is written on serving size because serving size is where a container changes an edible label. The other two are written on their own spines and the shelf underneath is the same shelf.

Which is the honest way round

Rather than three properties each implying a bespoke shelf and each quietly describing the same 97 rows.

Fixing it is an index change

Archetype assignment at the leaf level, or a second axis for interior finish and dose format. Stated here so the position is known.

References

Measured 19 October 2026. The three cannabis groups edibles, concentrates and flower, and adjacent botanicals return the same 97 containers and 260 closures, identical in count, family, color and neck finish down to a single stray deodorant container. The cause is that our index assigns a packaging archetype at the spoke level, and all three spokes resolve to the same one. 19 leaves, one shelf.

The Davis Pack Supply catalog, measured 19 October 2026. The edibles shelf is 357 rows: 97 containers and 260 closures. 30 to 473 mL with a median of 177, every container with a capacity on file. 22 under 60 mL, 2 between 60 and 90, 73 over 90. By count: 23 at 237 mL, 21 at 118, 17 at 59, 13 at 473, 6 at 177, 6 at 355, 3 at 30. 66 PP and 31 glass, with no PET, HDPE or metal. 78 jars, 12 tubs and pails, 6 bottles, 1 tube. 29 white, 24 natural, 19 clear, 11 black, 8 amber, 4 frosted, 2 blue. Closures: 164 continuous thread polypropylene lids, 39 metal or aluminum CT caps, 22 dome lids, 14 child resistant, 9 sealing discs, 6 round tub lids, 3 phenolic, 2 metal overshell lids.

Written from 21 CFR 101.9 and 101.12 and from the catalog as it stood on 19 October 2026. The serving-size rules quoted here are the federal food-labeling rules; dose caps, potency labeling, child-resistant packaging and exit packaging for a licensed cannabis edible are set state by state and nothing here describes them. Four of the reference amounts that matter on this shelf are expressed in grams and our capacity field is in millilitres, so for gummies, chocolate and baked goods our data cannot tell you which band a jar falls in.